Inside the Magic Pocket - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.dropbox.com/tech/2016/05/inside-the-magic-pocket/ <comment><USER2> Hey folks, this is James from Dropbox. As with the last post ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11282948](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11282948)) a few of us will check in from time to time to see if there are any questions.

Apologies for taking so long to get this blog post out! We'll follow up with a few more posts going into more technical details.

<comment><USER3> Nice engineering work! This is a really interesting case study.

Has the investment into bespoke storage technologies and data centers paid off already, given the real costs to build and set it up, and opportunity costs for other uses of engineering time? How long did it take to pay off through reduced costs, or when do you expect it will in the future? It would be interesting to learn at what point it might be worthwhile for a large player in a space like file storage to switch from existing commodity cloud solutions or proprietary on-premise solutions to custom ones -- as an extrapolation basis for other problems.

The general implication behind my question is: a custom solution can provide lower cost when viewed in isolation on a per-unit basis, but the total costs to the business must also account for the engineering work to develop, troubleshoot, deploy, and migrate to the storage system, as well as the time needed to lease and build data centers, etc., as well as to operate facilities and software stacks long-term; and to hire people to do that specifically; and also take into account the other things one could have done but cannot due to the decision to focus on a given problem (e.g., if the investment purely lowers cost, then that might be a tradeoff compared to another project that adds differentiating features. I know your blog post also mentioned performance, so it's not either-or) To make a good decision one must also weigh the expected value of alternatives, e.g., the current and predicted feature-sets of existing cloud or on-premise storage technologies, their expected prices over time, their expected regional availability. There's also the complication of owning substantially more assets rather than having operational expenses on cloud providers or other third parties.

I'm just curious to learn more about how you think about navigating the decision space. Of course, there's significant strategic value to "owning one's own destiny", but it also seems to have required significant investment and attention from Dropbox engineering team for perhaps a few years.

Any general advice regarding how big your use-case needs to be before this kind of engineering is worthwhile? How do you analyze the situation to identify when that's the case -- how do you identify the inflection point with confidence? Was it your prototyping that helped you determine that you could execute on this approach?

<comment><USER4> I believe a team of one or two talented individuals can build something that scales well and that will save a HUGE amount of money once you get into any significant portion of a petabyte with your data. One or two months of S3's list price can easily pay for the cost of hardware. You can easily go with whitebox hardware from say supermicro, and colocation is SOOOO much less expensive. If your not storing a significant portion of a petabyte, its going to probably be cheaper development wise to just use S3. You also don't need to build something as complex as their system, they have to scale to exabytes. Unless you plan to hit that scale immediately or have that much data, you can build for something less complex and smaller to start.

<comment><USER2> Just a caveat I'll add is that you have to work really very hard to build a system with equivalent/better durability and availability guarantees as the big cloud storage providers. It's typically not possible to be significantly cheaper with these same guarantees unless you're at large scale with well- established supply chain organizations, etc.

Of course if you don't need 11+ nines of durability or multi-datacenter redundancy, or if you have lower access requirements, then you can exploit those reduced requirements to your advantage.

<comment><USER2> To be clear, we do need those durability and availability guarantees :)

We just benefit from our very-large scale and close alignment between hardware and software to tailor our infrastructure to our workloads.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> What are some of the cool advantages of rebuilding Magic Pocket with Rust (outside of just memory usage)?

<comment><USER6> (We actually only rebuilt two components in Rust--most of Magic Pocket is still go.)

Memory usage/control, easy FFI with C, safety/correctness of code. Those were the big advantages for our projects.

Edit: deterministic destruction of resources is pretty great too. Yay RAII.

Edit 2: So is the ability to use the "standard" C tool suite for performance, memory, debugging, etc. valgrind, jemalloc profiling, gdb/lldb, perf. All that stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> What were some of the funnest engineering challenges Dropbox faced when deciding on architectural implementations or how to get a system that could store exabytes?

</comment><comment><USER8> Since this is a distributed system, did you consider using Erlang for the implementation?

<comment><USER6> Nope, honestly. Go is dropbox's primary infrastructure programming language. There's an extensive internal library/culture/toolset around go, so it made the most sense to use that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> > immutable block storage system

There are higher order problems that result in that insight.</comment>


Hyperloop One reveals strongest potential Hyperloop routes - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/14/hyperloop-one-global-finalists <comment><USER2> For the lazy:

U.S. Cheyenne – Denver – Puelbo (360 miles) Chicago – Columbus – Pittsburgh (488 miles) Miami – Orlando (257 miles) Dallas – Houston (640 miles)

U.K. Edinburgh – London (414 miles) Glasgow – Liverpool (339 miles)

Mexico Mexico City – Guadalajara (330 miles)

India Bengaluru – Chennai (208 miles) Mumbai – Chennai (685 miles)

Canada Toronto – Montreal (400 miles)

<comment><USER3> There is a project for high speed rail between Dallas and Houston being worked on, though it's not guaranteed to proceed.

If it did, I assume that would take the wind out of a hyperloop proposal. The train is supposed to take 90 minutes, so there wouldn't be much pressure to improve that, I would guess.

<comment><USER4> I think it could. As proposed, it's no different that taking a flight (50m + airport time) and slated to be similarly priced - so what's the point.

Also, Houston<>Dallas = 240 miles not the 640 quoted

<comment><USER3> Depending on who you ask, though, "airport time" could be 2+ hours. Especially DFW airport. And IAH isn't really in an area of Houston anyone wants to go to...it's far north of most of Houston. A 90 minute train would be a no brainier decision for me.

<comment><USER5> And going through airport security is a hassle, whereas time spent sitting on a train is time you can use to get work done. A train also is much less cramped than a plane, has better Internet access generally (you can just tether), and is probably less likely to be delayed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> How's the proposed Dubai to Abu Dhabi route coming along? Hyperloop One announced that last year. That's the ideal situation - flat undeveloped desert between the endpoints. Few routing problems. Short distance. Enough money to make it work.[1]

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi8o8gB_F24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi8o8gB_F24)

</comment><comment><USER7> Why not use the original street-car/suburb model?

Buy cheap land.

Build a highspeed line to a place with very high land values.

Profit.

And of course, start selling the land early to fund the line.

<comment><USER8> Selling would be a disaster in a 100 years. Leasing would be a better option. 100 year lease on the land near stations could subsidize the transit system during maintenance heavy years.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think this proves that the Hyperloop will be a complete economic failure.

The most important line is missing from the list.

* Los Angeles to San Francico and San Jose

* Los Angeles to Las Vegas

Who really wants to take a Hyperloop from Houston to Dallas?

And even if you can, then you need to rent a car just to get around, or spend several hundred dollars on Uber/Lyft.

<comment><USER10> This is a very California-centric mindset. The Houston-Dallas commute is the largest growing in the nation [1].

[1] [https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/rudincenter/supercommuter_repor...](https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/rudincenter/supercommuter_report.pdf)

<comment> aaron-lebo People really have no idea.

 _4 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 7,233,323 6,426,214 +12.56%_

 _5 Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 6,772,470 5,920,416 +14.39%_

Note, the areas above them top out at 3% growth. They could very easily be bigger than Chicago (3) in 15-20 years.

and:

 _24 San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 2,429,609 2,142,508 +13.40%_

 _31 Austin-Round Rock, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 2,056,405 1,716,289 +19.82%_

There is a single area with growth rates above that preceding them in the list.

One day Californians are gonna wake up and wonder how the hell everything moved to Texas. We'll take your industries, too. ;)

Actually, it's a little unnerving. The area is getting busier and busier, you can't drive 10 minutes down the highway without seeing numerous new apartment. I hope our metros can deal with these pops, but we'll see. Austin has gotten the worst of it. Thankfully we've been good about investment in things such as light rail.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistic...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas)

<comment><USER9> I love the folks of Texas!

But the fact remains.. it's pretty hot and humid over there.

As expensive as California is, the weather here is pretty nice.

No hurricanes, tornados, blizzards, or monsoons.

You just have to survive the occasional earthquake once every few decades.

<comment> aaron-lebo Cali weather definitely sounds like paradise.

The truth is from September to May the weather is pretty nice. The nights get chilly and into the 60s, the highs are hardly ever above 90, and from November to March we get actual seasons and winter, without it getting so cold you want to die.

It's a tradeoff. Plus if you don't merely adopt the humidity but are born into it, it really doesn't bother you much. Well, not sure how people live in Houston, but they do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> That UK routes feature at all on this list makes me feel it's not that grounded in "likely to happen in the near-medium term"

The UK has an existing High speed rail project, HS2([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_2)) which isn't as ambitious as what's proposed here, but is slated to cost £56 billion and isn't going to even reach Birmingham from London till 2026.

<comment><USER12> And instead of a track we've got an evacuated tube. I'm not saying that it it's not technically feasible, I'd just like to see the finance numbers. Surely London-Edinburgh would be well north of £100 billion. That's a _frightening_ amount. I suppose it's possible that hyperloop might replace future maglev systems: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev#Operational_systems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev#Operational_systems) ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> The I-25 corridor is ideal- 20 miles to the east of it is basically BFE so it should be relatively simple to acquire right of way compared to, say California or the Northeast corridor. Also easier to deal with one state gov't instead of multiple.

</comment><comment><USER14> Of course. Both Hyperloop and Boom are feasible both economically and physically. Not to mention Theranos and uBeam. LOL. OK, I cheated: at least physics is not against Boom. It just fits in this arch.

</comment><comment><USER15> "Toronto <-> Montreal" would be very interesting. It could help close some of the cultural gap between Québec and Ontario.

Edit: Why the downvotes? Canada is a big place. Being able to move quickly between the two metropolitan areas would be great for both provinces. The nearest city from Montréal is the city of Québec (3h drive) and the next closest is Toronto (5h drive).

<comment><USER16> Can you imagine if that route was built? Montreal real estate is affordable and Toronto is not. But, if you could travel to Toronto in 30 minutes from Montreal... that might change :)

[https://www.livingin-canada.com/house-prices- canada.html](https://www.livingin-canada.com/house-prices-canada.html)

<comment><USER17> To have an effect on housing prices, the hyperloop would have to move way more people than any numbers I've heard thrown around ("800 passengers per hour", "28 passengers every 30 seconds").

Montreal already has 1.7 million people, a couple thousand highly-paid commuters wouldn't make a dent.

Also I imagine if they built the thing that supply/demand would make it so expensive as to eliminate any savings from cheaper housing. The numbers that have been suggested wouldn't make Hyperloop a replacement for commuter trains, although it could be much better and cheaper than flying.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I assume this takes into consideration costs, because otherwise, I don't see how NYC-DC isn't number 1.

<comment><USER19> Yeah, NYC/DC would involve either really complicated/expensive on-land right- of-way acquisitions, or development of new underwater tunneling technology to put the tunnels off shore. Plus it's a corridor that's already served by lots of other existing transportation modes: extensive road network, rail, three airports on each end with direct flights from any one on either end to any one on the other, etc. I'm not surprised that there are other options with a higher value proposition.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Pretty telling how they left California off the list. The California High Speed Rail project is a testament to the pork, inefficiencies, poor planning, and NIMBYism involved in major infrastructure projects in this state.

<comment><USER21> It's also a testament to strong property rights.

<comment><USER22> Can you elaborate on this? I think I have something to learn from you here.

<comment><USER21> Sure. There's not much to say beyond "It is very expensive to do Eminent Domain takings in the US, especially in areas where market values for property are high."

The US is not a place where the state actually owns all the property, nor a place where the state has an indefeasible right of first refusal to purchase all property for a nominal sum.

<comment><USER22> What makes California distinct in this regard?

<comment><USER17> Could just be high property values.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Can anyone think of a good reason that something involving the Benelux and either Paris or Berlin isn't considered?

<comment><USER24> These cities are already connected through high-speed rail, so the added value would be lower I guess.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Who's commute is reflected in those destinations? Did they give this thing any thought?

<comment><USER21> I think there are better perspectives to look at it from than "replacing local commuter rail".

1\. What commutes will it suddenly make practical?

2\. What air traffic will it replace?

<comment><USER26> Being able to effectively commute from Columbus to Chicago would open up a lot of job opportunities for myself and many others.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: $100k and equity - <AUTHOR>

So I've got this idea for a pretty massive vertical app but I'm not a developer. Talked to a couple hackers (working at legit companies so seemed pretty comfortable with salary) - no interest. Contacted a development group today who 'got it' immediately and want to do it. The thing is though, they don't want to go in as full partners but want $100K + equity for devel. They've also got the contacts for the money. I'm totally dependent on them for devel work, contacts and hooking up with advertisers. I'm working at my own company 9x6 hours so can only do the specs for my portion of the app and be running the prototypes real-time, everyday. My idea, their 80% of the work. What's a fair split if they round up the 100K? How about if I come up with the money? <comment><USER2> Choices - I meant to write last night but got tied up. Being on that side of the table, I get their motivation. However, that sounds like a rather large amount of money.

LaunchBox Digital - an incubator around here - gives teams $20k I think, plus connections and other resources. $100k is _lot_ of money to develop a product. It's certainly not unreasonable if the specs call for it. But as someone else said, they're going to get paid regardless, PLUS they want future revenue from the idea.

I think you should shop around some more, and I'd be interested in talking to you more about this. Contact me at firstname.lastname@example.com - willing to consider a money/equity split, and probably not anywhere near a $100k deal. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, the basic part is pretty knarly with some heavy brick and mortarish aspects to it. The rest is pretty straightforward web stuff, I believe.

Thanks! I'll try to get in touch with LaunchBox today.

I'll drop you an email and you can see what I've got so far.

So what is a fair split?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> $100K sounds like a _lot_ for an app. With equity on top of that? I'd stay away.

Can you build a prototype of it? Even in Excel or something to get the general logic worked out?

<comment><AUTHOR> OK, this is much more than just an app. It is capturing a lot of data at one level, then there is the 'web level' where the public interacts with it. Lot of opportunity for revenue at the public level immediately (targeted ads). Vendors will be pushing 'specials' down to the first level when they see the apps getting some traction.. .

<comment><USER4> Can you try to generate some test data first, and create a mockup of the web interface? A web developer can do that and add some interactivity step by step in relatively little time.

When you have a vision of a finished product, it seems like so much work to get there. But usually you can break it down and find steps you can take iteratively.

Mocking up the idea will show you more about its potential and how it should be executed once developers start working on it for real.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is pretty much what I showed them. All the captured data, described how the apps work, what makes the data so valuable, etc. Like I said, they got it , but still made the case it was a lot of work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The fact that the original people you talked to were not interested may be a sign that your idea need refinement. You shouldn't take the development group's interest as approval, as they get 100K regardless of your success.

Before you continue, you should conduct focus groups with people who have knowledge of the subject area. Best of luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> When I was talking to the first couple of people, I hadn't really fleshed out the details clearly enough. And they really are happy in their corp jobs.

Yes, they get the 100k, but I would probably keep more equity that way. I was surprised at how genuinely excited they became as they realized their own need for the web level features. And, of course, they immediately took it mobile.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Sounds like you are going to get screwed if you go with the dev group. Especially since you will be talking to investors to which they will be introducing you.

Keep pounding the streets to find your technical co-founder. Go to meetups and other events. It's just like dating.

<comment><AUTHOR> Damn, I would love to find some people to go with this. Problem is, in one sense, it's a fairly obvious service but there's only room for one of them (database, ground level), so whoever executes first owns the world (really :)

<comment><USER6> I know you think your idea is the best invention since alcohol, but it probably is not. Given the choice between a half-assed execution of your awesome idea and finding the right person who can execute any idea I would choose the latter.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Also I'd like to add that you should mention the name of the dev group. What they're doing is certainly shady, if not completely unethical.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, they ARE a dev group and are customarily paid for their work. Also, this is pretty big and portions will be shipped overseas so there will be real costs incurred.If things get too weird, I'll post here.</comment></comment>


Idea Generation, Potential, and Growth - <AUTHOR> http://www.devtich.com/idea-generation-potential-growth/

<comment><USER2> I think brainstorming works a lot better without a leader, it can become chaotic at first, but at some point everyone will settle and ideas will start being exchanged; i believe a leader might inadvertently guide the conversation</comment>


ZURB Tavern - <AUTHOR> http://zurb.com/tavern

<comment><USER2> By the name, I thought that this was going to be a MUD.</comment>


MobileWorks (YC S11) is a Hands-Off Mechanical Turk - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/12/yc-funded-mobileworks-aims-to-be-a-hands-off-mechanical-turk/

<comment><USER2> The logo makes me nostalgic for my days as a BeOS user:

[http://www.iconfinder.com/icondetails/34752/128/beos_people_...](http://www.iconfinder.com/icondetails/34752/128/beos_people_users_icon)

 _UPDATE: If I remember correctly, the original BeOS icons were all 32x32 pixel art. I didn't find the original in my first quick Google search, but I found the above link instead which appears to be from an open-source stock icon set based on a vectorized version of the BeOS artwork. It also happens to match the image used on the MobileWorks site. Here are some of the original icons from BeOS:_ <http://dsandler.org/entries/images/2007/beman.png> and <http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/feb00/images/beos_1.l.gif>

_I didn't mean to imply that MobileWorks was copying anyone (or for my off- hand comment to get voted to the top of their launch announcement discussion). Their web site may be a licensed use of this stock art, which itself is an inexact copy/interpretation of the BeOS art._

<comment><USER3> Never seen this one before though I did play around with Haiku at one point. I will let our co-founder and Chief Design Officer know.

<comment><USER4> If you're a team of 4, what's the role of a _Chief_ Design Officer?

<comment><USER5> I would guess it's partially "have a funny title".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> We use Grasshopper for our phone-service. They do a computer-transcription of voice mail by default and they send it to you by email. If you don't like the auto-transcription from the email you can have it done by humans. And 5 min later you have a more accurate one in your inbox.

Which makes me think that there are a lot of services that could benefit from human intervention. I can see that you guys are starting out in a particular space but I think that the opportunity is huge!

</comment><comment><USER7> I wish this existed in the past -- trying to figure out best practices for mturk use is almost more work than just doing the task yourself, but simplifying it for common tasks makes it a lot more useful.

<comment><USER3> Even if you have invested time in MTurk, there is no reason you have to continue spending your time dealing with spam, dealing with task starvation, optimizing quality rather than focusing on your core competency.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Can they be given a task that requires additional research, training, or creativity?

Example: What if I sent you a dental xray and asked you to report cavity count and location? This would require minor training but could easily be done by anyone with a trained eye.

<comment><USER3> In it's present form no. But I do believe that if someone was to build an application with a correct work flow and focus on helping the crowd (by creating tutorial etc.) something like this could definitely work.

We would love to talk to developers who want to build innovative applications on our platform. We would also help in setting the right work-flow and improving quality.

<comment><USER8> Wonderful. I'll be in touch.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I didn't get the price. Care to explain? 100 tasks free, and then?

<comment><AUTHOR> Sure thing.

While the service is in beta, anyone can try a maximum of 100 tasks for free for any of the products built on MobileWorks: form digitization, web scraping, or tasks that new app developers build on the API. The idea is to get developers started working with crowd as easily as possible.

We'll announce the formal pricing for form digitization and scraping products soon.

For community-built applications, prices are set depending on the complexity of the task and how long it takes workers to do them. We time the first few workers to do a task to see how long it takes, then return a price based on that.

<comment><USER10> Congratulations, Anand! Didn't know you were in this yc batch.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! Looking forward to having the research community start using our crowd and giving us their thoughts.

Bonuses: no task starvation, no spammers, a usable API, and highly motivated workers.

<comment><AUTHOR> Let me also add that you probably know my co-founders Prayag, Philipp, and Dave from their days at Cal. MobileWorks spun out of Berkeley's Department of CS and School of Information, and was built in response to the pain we all felt as they struggled to get good results out of crowds.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Congrats guys! This team has been studying crowdsourcing for a long time and this startup is a product of everything they have learned.

</comment><comment><USER12> Regarding your TOS:

"Permission is granted to temporarily download one copy of the materials (information or software) on MobileWorks, Inc.'s web site for personal, non- commercial transitory viewing only."

I see nowhere in the TOS that if I upload data and pay for some data transformation that I own the copyright to the transformed data. According to the current wording, it seems that YOU own all the output. Could you explain?

Also, what does the following mean: "Call us toll free at 800 100 4023 from any India phone."

Lastly, do you have a support _email_ address? I prefer that channel, since I can archive support for future reference.

<https://sandbox.mobileworks.com/contact/message/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for catching this! It's an unintended ambiguity in the wording.

These TOS refer to the website itself, not to the API or platform. When you pay to use the MobileWorks crowd for your own work, the output is yours, not ours.

We'll adapt the terms to better reflect what's intended!

<comment><AUTHOR> The developer sandbox presently shows a fairly faithful representation of what workers see when they use the application, including the phone number and chat window workers can use to contact us.

If you'd like to reach us directly, you can use firstname.lastname@example.com.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "Unfortunately things are a little more complicated than that."

When it said that, I thought it was because of [http://coinnovative.com/the- mechanical-turk-experiment-how-i...](http://coinnovative.com/the-mechanical- turk-experiment-how-i-made-218-an-hour-and-how-you-can-too/)

</comment><comment><USER14> Congrats Anand!

I've been working in the crowdsourcing field for several years now (our workers are from Vietnam), and can understand that the profit margins can be very thin for some of the more basic tasks.

Drop me a line if you're interested in branching out to Vietnam.

</comment><comment><USER15> Having trouble registering here: <https://sandbox.mobileworks.com/accounts/register/>

It just ends up refreshing the page, with the form still filled in (except password fields).

<comment><AUTHOR> Let's figure out what's going on with your activation!

Could you send us the username you're trying to activate, as well as your browser and OS stats? firstname.lastname@example.com. We'll get it resolved.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I have testing this out and must say that the communications from Prayag have been very very helpful. Thanks so much for clear line of communication on and about your product.

</comment><comment><USER17> Pricing page has no pricing.

Cannot commit to testing a platform that cannot commit to me a price of some sort? ... are they treating me like a crowdsourced beta tester?

<comment><AUTHOR> We are in fact in beta right now, so we expect to announce formal pricing in the very near future for the digitizer and excavator products.

Prices for new applications pushed with the API are always different. They're set based on the complexity and difficulty of the task. We have a few workers try out a new task to see how complex it is, then use that to establish a price so that workers can earn a fair wage.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Do the workers speak and write English?

<comment><AUTHOR> The majority do, but no all. We track accuracy obsessively, and tasks requiring fluent English won't go to workers with the weakest skills.

Our crowd is surprisingly diverse – there are medical students, engineers, doctors and housewives.

For our best-tested category of work to date, optical character recogition, even workers with the weakest English skills do well at recognizing English text.

<comment><USER19> I hope that your workers aren't solving CAPTCHAs for hire, but that's probably a vain hope.

<comment><AUTHOR> In fact, I can guarantee they're not solving CAPTCHAs for hire. Our review process for new software applications keeps the quality of our tasks high and keeps spam work out.

CAPTCHA-breaking jobs generally rely on sweatshop labor and don't pay the fair wages we do, so they're not even capable of hiring our workers.

One of our core motivations as a team and a company is to use crowdsourcing as a force for good: happy workers, better technology, no spam. If you're interested in cracking CAPTCHAs, we'll be happy to refer you to our better known, difficult-to-use competitor.

Handwritten and printed OCR tasks, on the other hand, are fantastic for our system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Bravo, this looks like a really savvy way to handle these kinds of tasks.

</comment><comment><USER21> Congrats Anand et al! It's gonna be fun competing...

<comment><AUTHOR> On the contrary! You should be using our crowd instead of Turk's.

<comment><USER22> Congrats from Houdini as well; MobileWorks looks great! We'd definitely be interested exploring this option further.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Congrats guys! Berkeley I School & CS FTW :)

</comment><comment><USER24> This sounds awesome.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! I happen to think so, too :)

The reason is that putting humans inside software lets you do incredibly powerful things.

Here's one of my favorite examples from the academic world, but it took a slew of difficult crowd-control hacks and months of research to get it working on Turk: <http://hci.cs.rochester.edu/currentprojects.php?proj=vw>

It'd be a weekend project to rebuild it on MobileWorks.

<comment><USER25> Sounds interesting. Similar to Crowdflower, but with less management on the user end. Crowdflower provides "gold tests" that help filter out mistakes and makes it my go-to source for Turk tasks with a bit too much complexity. Of course, that means I have to manage questions, gold tests and review results. The value proposition here is thus quite appealing. Suppose we wanted to grab information from historic form D's:

[http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/vprr/03/9999999997-03-0208...](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/vprr/03/9999999997-03-020891)

These older forms lack consistency and would probably require lengthy instructions for data extraction. How do you do quality control?

<comment><USER3> One of the founders here.

We do a number of things to maintain quality. We do managed crowdsourcing, which means we provide support to our crowd. They can ask us when they do not understand a particular task. Also, our crowd is loosely forming a community both online and IRL. So, people help each other.

On top of that we have developed algorithms that check the crowd's answer against each other. Our algorithms also make sure that the right task is routed to the right person.

We also believe in paying our workers fairly. Happy, more productive workers leads to better quality work.

<comment><USER25> Awesome, sounds like you automated and crowd-sourced quality control. Will definitely check it out.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Charlie's Diary: Why I Hate Star Trek (2009) - <AUTHOR> http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2009/10/why_i_hate_star_trek.html <comment><USER2> > _As you probably guessed, this is not how I write SF — in fact, it 's the > antithesis of everything I enjoy in an SF novel._

That's fine, but it misses the point of Star Trek. Star Trek isn't science fiction. Star Trek is morality plays in space. The tech isn't supposed to matter except insofar as it allows for certain metaphysical explorations like transporter duplication events and resource abundance. The tech isn't the point. The tech exists to explore ( _gasp_ ) "the interpersonal relationships among the cast".

Is Stross just saying that he doesn't like genres other than hard SciFi? I mean, that's OK. People can like different things.

<comment><USER3> On the other hand, while I read only _Accellerando_ and all the Laundry novels so far (so I might have a limited viewpoint on his work), I would argue that "interpersonal relationships among the cast" is not really his forte...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > "The biggest weakness of the entire genre is this: the protagonists don't > tell us anything interesting about the human condition under science > fictional circumstances."

The author mentions Voyager by name and references Next Generation characters, but refers to Deep Space Nine as "the one with the space station".

DS9 explores the impact of futuristic society on humanity more than the others because it takes place in a stationary setting within a complex geo-political dispute. So far I like it best out of OST, TNG, and Voyager.

<comment><USER5> DS9 was really ahead if it's time. It tried to do series wide story arcs long before it became standard and almost a decade before the networks tried to ruin Firefly by airing them out of order. It holds up surprisingly well, even if I feel it failed to fully realize it's potential.

In any event, it's certainly the only Star Trek I feel the need to binge occassionally, and it definitely helped me get through a lot of rough nights dealing with twin infants last year.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> The opposite of this would be shows like _House, M.D._ , where the technicalities (i.e. the medical facts) are central to the plot, as opposed to being elaborate McGuffins.

<comment><USER7> I've only watched a few episodes, but isn't house just medical mcguffin of the week? Every episode I've seen has certainly followed that arc, it's always some exceedingly rare malady that only house is smart enough to diagnose.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Thank you for posting this. I was just joking at work a few days ago about how my job sounds like Geordi's babble. Open source X doesn't connect to Y because of Z? Well I'll just reroute to the auxiliary EPS grid and use the main deflector dish.

(PS - I love Star Trek, but even I realize that this is ridiculous)</comment>


Elite colleges lower women's wages - <AUTHOR> http://www.overcomingbias.com/2011/02/elite-college-fems-earn-less.html

<comment><USER2> Do we have any good theories about mechanisms for this other than "One obvious explanation is that women at more elite colleges married richer classmate men, and so felt less need to earn money themselves."?

<comment><USER3> Of course there are. Which makes Hanson's next sentence - "Why don't the study's authors want us to hear about that?" - surprising. Overcoming Bias, indeed.

<comment><AUTHOR> I believe that Hanson was remarking on the fact that, although the explanation given is plausible, the authors didn't discuss it in the paper and pooled men and women together afterwards. I don't think he was putting it forward as the only possible explanation.

<comment><USER3> But Hanson doesn't say "Why don't the study's authors discuss possible explanations for this finding, such as xxx?" Instead, he insinuates that the authors were perfectly aware of this possible explanation, but think that their readers should not be exposed to it for some nefarious reasons (that's what the phrase "why doesn't X want us to hear Y" means colloquially). This sentence leads me to believe that Hanson is coming to this discussion with some biases of his own.

Anyway, other explanations could be that the result is not real (which Hanson does discuss at the end), or that women from these colleges choose lesser- paying careers for some reason other than that they are married to rich men ... perhaps women at elite colleges 25 years ago were unusually interested in charity work. I don't think Hanson's proposed explanation is necessarily wrong, but that phrase "why don't they want us to hear about this?" really rubs me the wrong way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'd just like to note that Robin Hanson's blog is generally quite thought provoking. He posts on a variety of topics relating to psychology and economics, often from the viewpoint of status competition and signalling. Really fascinating stuff.

</comment><comment><USER5> Still a shock to me- although I wouldn't be surprised to hear that all of the exotic, esoteric liberal arts programs offered at elite colleges don't lead to high paying careers.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, I feel like there must be something else going on. Regardless of the quality of top colleges, you'd think selectivity alone would lead to a higher earning group. Apparently according to the guy's update, the sample controlled for women who left the workforce entirely, so rich doctor hubby from Harvard isn't the answer..

I'd note that people who go to extremely selective colleges and are white (and maybe asian) are almost definitely from a pretty well-off family. The study did notice that black and hispanic people showed a huge income increase, so maybe the people who were already well off felt less of a need to make money, they take some socially beneficial or interesting-to-them job in exchange for less pay.

Another note.. this is on earnings 20 years later, which might make sense for a few reasons but also means that things could have changed in the last 20 years (not that I have a reason to think they have).

<comment><USER7> Even if you control for leaving the workforce entirely, rich doctor hubby from Harvard could still be the answer in that it frees up idealistic wife from Harvard to work in non-profits or other spiritually rewarding but non- remunerative jobs.

That said, those are just conjectures -- I think it's more interesting that the result was so jarring to them they didn't bother following up with some sort of potential explanation.

<comment><USER8> And the results seem to change so much from data source to data source and cohort, and just about any other factor that it is clear to me that we really don't have a solid statement.

I wouldn't be at all surprised that they do this with 1995 data and the results are completely different.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Future of Monetization Isn't What It Used to Be - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/advr-content-discovery/the-future-of-monetization-isnt-what-it-used-to-be-6ff09ebc52e2 <comment><USER2> There's nothing wrong with "sponsored content," as log as it meets the same quality bar of the content I consume. I don't like shit games, I don't like shit ads. I like funny, clever, or otherwise good ads, just like I like good games.</comment>


What's it like to work at GitHub? - <AUTHOR> http://opensoul.org/blog/archives/2012/06/05/whats-it-like-to-work-at-github/ <comment><USER2> "Talented people with a lot of experience have strong opinions."

i hear this often. and i've worked with some people like that, many of whom i admire (in some ways).

yet i am not at all opinionated (as far as i can tell). when people ask me for advice, i often find it very hard to guide them because there are so many options, and what will work best seems to depend so much on non-technical factors.

and i am not sure what to do about this. i have tried being more opinionated, and there are times when a decision affected my work and i have _fought_ for what was right, because i am doing the work. but often other people, opinionating, just seem like noise (worse, sometimes i suspect people confuse being opinionated with understanding something).

no real conclusion here, sorry. sometimes i wonder if people are too opinionated; sometimes i wonder if i am not opinionated enough (or if i am not that talented - although i do take re-assurance from the d-k effect). but that part of the post, and a related comment by the author here, disturbed me a little. i am not sure a place full of opinionated people is that pleasant (or optimal).

i was wondering if this touches a chord with anyone else?

<comment><USER3> "The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." - Bertrand Russell

<comment><USER2> also, "second coming" by yeats, but i am not sure it is true - i have been lucky enough to work with some very good people, and some of the best were like this.

as j_baker says, it seems like it's just one of those "life is complicated" things...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Sounds a bit like Valve. <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3871463> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3838880>

Or the free 20% at Google.

I get the feeling that if you have a group of highly talented people around, it really pays off to give them much freedom.

From the view of the employee, it is also probably a much more motivating, challenging and interesting setting.

<comment><USER5> I was about to say the same thing about Valve before I got the comments section :) Also, very much agree with letting the talented do their thing as long as wisdom is also apparent. Allow them to infect each other with their enthusiasm and they will innately work together to build something great. Someone who is chained to something is not going to have that enthusiasm and will typically make that known through their mood and action, if not through complaining. A poor mood is just as infectious as enthusiasm.

My sentiment is that hiring talent and then weighing them down with excessive restrictions and bureacracy is like buying a Ferrari and driving it 55mph during the daily commute. Why waste the money on that HP, when you can get a cheaper vehicle. Let the Ferrari's drive; hire a Civic if that is the kind of work you are going to give it :)

<comment><USER6> >hire a Civic if that is the kind of work you are going to give it

I think people don't necessarily understand the motivations of many people in management positions. They do not care at all about performance or getting to the destination. They want to be seen in a Ferrari. Many didn't earn their positions, suck at their jobs, and will spend the company's money freely to promote their careers. They are like lottery winner who are just hiring expensive top people without a plan or experience to put one together. All they want of the world, all they want, is to impress their bosses and get promoted. Nothing else matters to them, period. To them, software is simply one part of the business that is a means to move up the corporate ladder. Excessive restrictions and bureaucracy don't matter in this environment because the developer's job is simply to boost the profile of their PHB.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > _On a few occasions, someone may suggest that I check out a project that > could use my help, but nobody tells me what to do._

> _I quickly learned that if I can't get anyone else interested in the project > that I want to work on, then either I poorly articulated my vision, or more > likely, it does not benefit the company._

These appear to be the main points, so there is a kind of pressure to work on things that benefit the company.

My question is, how does overall strategy get set then? There are probably 1,000 things you could do to benefit the company, but only a small number of them have a huge effect, some of them require coordination to _really_ help, and some of them might be diametrically opposed to each other.

Who makes these decisions, when there are multiple viable ways of going forward, but someone just has to put their foot down and decide which one?

<comment><AUTHOR> We have the advantage of using GitHub to build GitHub ([http://zachholman.com/talk/how-github-uses-github-to- build-g...](http://zachholman.com/talk/how-github-uses-github-to-build- github)), so we all know what needs worked on. There is certainly some vision casting from a few core people, but everyone takes responsibility for figuring out what needs done and coordinating how to do it.

> Who makes these decisions, when there are multiple viable ways of going > forward, but someone just has to put their foot down and decide which one?

We all do, but whoever submits the first pull request usually sets the tone of the conversation. Occasionally, a pull request will get abandoned, but usually it is the starting point and we build from there.

There are often intense conversations about how something should work. I've learned to just try one way and see if you like it. Not everyone will, but you can form some consensus.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> As the director of an engineering team myself, this is an extremely insightful article.

Bossing people around and utilizing extreme micromanagement might work in retail (though, honestly, I doubt it), but being a drill sergeant is _not_ the way to get things done with very intelligent and headstrong individuals in a technical capacity.

The trick of excellent technical management, to me, is the ability to balance the business requirements of management with the technical passions of the engineers. If this balance is off in either direction, the company as a whole suffers greatly.

Engineers need to be intellectually engaged, and need to feel that they can make decisions for themselves (even if it's just within the code base). At the same time, products and services need to ship to keep everyone employed.

It's a tough but rewarding job.

</comment><comment><USER9> _I absolutely love the service that we are building. But even more than that, I love the company we are building._

I think this is one of the strong points of GitHub. Everyone I know who has gone to work there has a real love for the _company_ as much as the team. I'm not convinced as many of the many Rubyists heading to, say, LivingSocial (which has an amazing, all star _team_ ) feel the same way.

The egalitarian approach clearly has some significant plusses, but a downside IMHO is salary (it has been stated people generally have the same base salary at GitHub - <https://github.com/holman/feedback/issues/150>). Egalitarian salary structures work for some but also have their downsides.

</comment><comment><USER10> I think Github is a special case because at Github they are their own customers.

Developer/hackers know what other developer/hackers want because they want it themselves.

It's a great place to be as a developer and as a product company, but I don't think it's attainable everywhere.

<comment><USER11> Exactly my point. I think what they are doing is great and there is a lot to learn from it. However, they have very talented developers whose job is to build tools for other developers. Scratching your own itch is much more likely to benefit the organization at GH than it is at, say, a corporate IT department or any other company whose customers aren't developers.

A big part of what makes their culture possible is the product they are building and the customer that they are building it for. Change those things, and unfortunately, you are very likely to have to change the culture a bit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I wonder if they face the challenge of who has to deal with the less popular things that need to get done. And at what point resentment might kick in. The whole thing seems like it can work until there's one bad apple or one miscommunication.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a question I hear often, or another form of it: "How do you get people to do things that nobody wants to do?" I usually answer this with two questions:

1\. If everyone deeply cares about the culture and longevity of the company (which is a prerequisite), and nobody wants to do it, does it really need to get done? The answer is often no. But if the answer is yes…

2\. How do you turn that into a celebrated task where everyone wants to do it?

One example of this at GitHub is support. Developers hate doing support. But we have decided that it is absolutely vital to our company to both provide good support and to have developers involved in it so we are constantly getting feedback about what is working and what is not.

So we created the "King of Developers", which is a position that is held by a developer for one week at a time, in which that developer's primary responsibility is support. Along with that comes a pimped out desk at our HQ in San Francisco and tons of street cred. We even have a ridiculous internal website to go along with it (<http://dribbble.com/shots/554836-GitHub-King-of- Developers>). There are currently 9 developers signed up waiting to be the King.

<comment><USER12> Thanks for the detailed response. At my current work place everyone rotates through support as well (dev, sales, ops), and I agree with you: the only way to make these kinds of things work is with an exceptionally strong culture, and not compromising.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Github developers and designers are all big users of the product. I hope they change how the world works on developer tools. But a different (or at least very modified) vision is going to be needed at a company working on products that their developers don't use.

</comment><comment><USER14> The reason why this environment works at GitHub is because they're profitable -- extremely so. Money rolls in regardless of what their engineers are working on. If they were in a pre-revenue state I doubt they would be organized in the same way.

<comment><USER15> GitHub has been organized this way since it was in a pre-revenue state.

<comment><USER14> This is a misleading statement. According to Chris' founder story, they had customers at launch and he was the sole programmer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I find posts like this disheartening. I'm sure this strategy works great for the upper echelon of developers and quite possibly the vast majority of self- selected readers of this very site. But there are many companies and developers that are way down the bell curve that probably could not survive in this type of environment.

I wish more posts would take into account more factors like sub-optimal talent or office politics.

</comment><comment><USER17> They say people work on what they want but they still advertise for specific jobs (<https://github.com/about/jobs>), so surely there is some level of direction there. i.e. If you're hired as a Data Miner then you are expected to spend your time mining data, what happens when that engineer decides he wants to work on something else?

<comment><USER18> We've been splitting up into teams (or roles) a bit more as we've grown- it just helps to keep the focus on things that matter.

That said, the most important part about this is that those teams are extremely weak. In other words, you should feel strongly able to float between teams, work on different repositories, or take a week or month off and pursue a different problem if the problem seems important or if it keeps you happy and productive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> One question comes to mind after reading this, as did with the Valve handbook, how do you tackle when it is time to "shovel shit"? Meaning that doing things that are, quite frankly, boring.

</comment><comment><USER20> I wonder how this would shake out in a consulting company?

<comment><USER21> The difficulty in a consulting company is that (unlike a SaaS company) there is typically a 1:1 ratio between hours worked and money earned.

Our company does many of the same things, but in the end, we're still tied to the billable hour. I talked about it briefly here: [http://lincolnloop.com/blog/2012/may/31/lincoln-loop- everyon...](http://lincolnloop.com/blog/2012/may/31/lincoln-loop-everyone- sets-their-own-salary/)

<comment><USER20> Wow..just read your post. A couple questions...

      How many people are in the company?
      Usually being the owner and founder you get more money. How do you avoid "The boss takes all the money" comment. Not saying you are, but I think this comes   up even if your making only a little more then everyone else.
      What happens when a developer asks for more money then your willing to give?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Some orgs just hit the sweet spot for a certain kind of mentality; if this is reasonably accurate I'm not surprised the most frequent kind of post on the Github blog is "<your name here> is a Githubber".</comment>


SR-71 Blackbird used the stars to correct navigation - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_SR-71_Blackbird#Astro-Inertial_Navigation_System <comment><USER2> Aircraft carriers navigated by the stars right up to the Korean War. Blew my mind when I toured the USS Hornet in Alameda.</comment>


Growing CA pension costs hitting cities and fire districts – hard - <AUTHOR> https://calmatters.org/commentary/pension-costs-taxes-firefighters/ <comment><USER2> Serves them right, give in to the unions and give huge wages and benefits for 30 years and this is where you end up - broke. The unions do not care, they just tighten the screws.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Title taken from that used in the print edition of the San Jose Mercury, 11/5, page A7.</comment>


Nintendo Discontinues the NES Classic Edition - <AUTHOR> http://ign.com/articles/2017/04/13/nintendo-discontinues-the-nes-classic-edition <comment><USER2> There had been some speculation on Reddit that it was a run of near-obsolete hardware proposed by one of their partners. Some teardown (I can't find a source now) found out that it was shipping with already EOL'ed components that weren't available for back-order from the fabs.

If anyone has more information than my 3rd hand comment, I'd be super interested. I was very disappointed not to find one for sale for a reasonable price. I would have loved one.

<comment><USER3> If true that would be a really creative way of making some nice profits. Typically distributors are anxious to dump excess EOL parts as demand will plummet. According to my friend who was an account manager at Wyle they would sell off their stock to one of the 'old part finders' for 1/2 to 1/4 of the previous suggested price.

If Nintendo proactively found a bunch of EOL parts they could make a nice limited edition product out of, the buy the parts at a steep discount, sell the 'limited edition' at a price premium, and maximize their gross margin. Frankly I've never met a procurement manager with the guts to do something like that but I'm sure they are out there.

<comment><USER4> While not an exact example, it matches GameBoy creator Gunpei Yokoi's concept of "Lateral Thinking with Withered Technology." The idea is that you find widely understood tech, which is inexpensive due to its widespread use in other areas, and find a way to use it in making games. Everything from using calculator LED displays for the Game & Watch to using an accelerometer in a Wii Remote follows that principle.

Sourcing a bunch of inexpensive parts and throwing together something like the NES Classic Edition to fill the gap in an otherwise Nintendo-less holiday season seems to fit that mantra.

Yokoi made some of the first toys (for personal enjoyment, out of spare parts in a factory) which, when Nintendo's young president Yamauchi saw them, convinced him to really commit to the consumer toy space.

<comment><USER5> >an accelerometer in a Wii Remote

I don't think this is the best example, accelerometers were not a cheap common part at the time. The Wii predates the iPhone, MEMS accelerometers were not anywhere near as widely deployed as they are now and they cost an order of magnitude or two more.

I can remember hobbyists buying Wii Remotes after launch just to rip out the sensors :)

IMO, perfect example is the B&W LCD on the original DMG Gameboy. A generation behind the competition, but cheap and low-power for the time.

<comment><USER6> The Wii Remote is more an example of Iwata's Blue Ocean strategy.

The rest of the Wii hardware however..

<comment><USER7> A Gamecube with an extra chip...

<comment><USER6> Exactly, nobody said that proven and established hardware couldn't be _your own hardware_ after all

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> How disappointing. I was hoping Nintendo was taking a lesson from Steam: if you make it stupid easy to pay and play games then people will pay for them. NES Classic was a way to, legally, play a whole bunch of old Nintendo games without resorting to cheap emulators and pirated games that many, many gamers resort to.

I'm hoping they're going to re-release this in the near future or something similar that is at a similar price point but let's you play a back catalog of NES, SNES and N64 games. If they had a legal way for me to do that I would pick it up in a heart beat.

I guess the alternative is offering all these classic games on the Switch but is the target audience really the same? A $300 handheld versus a $60 dedicated classic TV console?

I also wonder if Nintendo could destroy the market of cheap / gimmicky consoles that you can buy for like $50 that include "150 games!". Release something that anyone can afford, hook it up to an e-store and let game devs release cheap games on it. It would be like hooking up the N64 / SNES / NES consoles with online services.

I think I rambled a little bit but hopefully it made sense.

<comment><USER9> Nintendo is run by old men who will not do anything different. Trying to get Nintendo to change is a laborious task, requiring _everyone_ to be on board with it.[0] Combine it with their copyright, trademark, and Youtube monetization policies, if it had it's way, Nintendo would love having no one play with their toys.

Mr. Sterling has preached about Nintendo many times before:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRicuKHmjZA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRicuKHmjZA)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_vGe68T6sM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_vGe68T6sM)

[0] [http://www.polygon.com/2015/1/21/7867965/conservative- stuffy...](http://www.polygon.com/2015/1/21/7867965/conservative-stuffy-old- nintendo-and-its-weird-habit-of-wild)

> _" Nintendo is not only a Japanese company, it is a Kyoto-based company," he > said, replying to a question about the difficulty of effecting change at > Nintendo. "For people who aren't familiar, Kyoto-based are to Japanese > companies as Japanese companies are to U.S. companies. They're very > traditional, and very focused on hierarchy and group decision making. > Unfortunately, that creates a culture where everyone is an advisor and no > one is a decision maker, but almost everyone has veto power."_

<comment><USER10> While I'm tempted to make a blanket statement that "tradition is the bane of progress," I think in this case it's a little more nuanced.

Nintendo needs a competitor. Sony and Microsoft are competitors of each other; Nintendo has not been in that fight for over a decade now.

I'd be hard pressed to define exactly what Nintendo is, though, and what kind of competitor it needs.

<comment><USER11> I'd argue that Nintendo's biggest competitors are the iPhone and Android game markets.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Nintendo makes the most confusing business decisions.

<comment><USER13> The only possible explanation I can think of is that a replacement product is in the works (e.g, wider game selection, SNES support, downloadable games, etc). Otherwise... WTF.

<comment><USER14> That product is called the Switch.

<comment><USER15> The Switch has a lesser appeal than a $50 box that has a lifetime of nostalgia.

<comment><USER16> Not for everybody, and not for most people I'd wager.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> From the moment this was launched I had wanted to buy one but never could find one in stock at MSRP. Eventually just built a RetroPie box :/

<comment><USER18> How hard was it to build? Any tips?

<comment><USER19> I started from here: [https://retropie.org.uk/](https://retropie.org.uk/)

It was actually quite simple. Starting from opening the box on the RPi, that I'd never touched before, being kind of a Linux moron, and tracking down the necessary hardware (an old TV and USB joystick, and some networking stuff), I had it running in just a couple of hours.

The only thing that slowed me down at all was figuring out how to copy ROM files onto it through the network.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Nintendo certainly makes it difficult to consistently play their old titles.

<comment><USER21> It's actually super easy.

Just go to the pirate bay and download an emulator.

<comment><USER22> To _legally_ play their old titles then.

And anyways, that's not Nintendo making it easy, that's the people who build emulators and rip ROMs making it easy.

<comment><USER23> I don't generally condone piracy. But I also believe that when a company makes it hard to enjoy their games, or tries to milk money out of games that are 30 years old, that I've probably paid for several times over the years, then I don't care anymore. If even .1% of Nintendo's revenue comes from NES/SNES games, then they are doing it VERY wrong. And if it's less, I don't feel bad because I know I'm not ruining some market segment.

I had an NES as a kid, rebought an NES in college with most of my childhood games, and bought quite a few games on Wii virtual console. These games arent easily portable, take up a lot of space, and I'm not even sure how to hook an NES up to a modern TV offhand. NES won't give me simplicity for the games I've paid for, so by definition of terrible copyright laws, I resort to "piracy". And while im there, theres other games i always wanted to try as a kid, that nintendo will make difficult for me to play (heck, if I went to piracy for legally owned games, why would games i dont own be any easier). It's a vicious cycle.

steam has demonstrated that you can easily cut piracy simply by making things readily available and easy to use. dont give people incentive and then complain about it.

<comment><USER24> > I'm not even sure how to hook an NES up to a modern TV offhand.

The original NES had RCA composite output (plus audio) - so all you'd need is a composite-to-HDMI adaptor, like this one:

[https://www.amazon.com/Portta-Composite-Converter-Scaler- sup...](https://www.amazon.com/Portta-Composite-Converter-Scaler- support/dp/B00CQ3K0PY/)

For something like the Sega Genesis (not that you wondered), it also had composite output, but needed a "special" mini-DIN cable; the pinout is out there, and an RCA jack can be soldered in place if you wanted. Also, the same jack (IIRC) served up S-VIDEO, so you could use that instead (S-VIDEO to HDMI).

If all you had was RF output (like for an Atari 2600) - you could do a RF-to- Composite converter, then from that into a Composite-to-HDMI converter.

Where you might run into problems on all of these solutions are those areas where artifacting was used on-screen to generate false colors; sometimes the converters will strip that out (their conversion is too good), or the TV will (same thing, plus LCD vs CRT tech).

<comment><USER25> Those adapters are fine now, but what about in 10 years when it's even harder to find a working NES? 20? 50? At some point there will be no more working systems and cartridges, but because of the efforts of pirates these games can and probably will live forever.

<comment><USER26> There are alternatives like the Analogue NT which is fully compatible with the entire Nintendo library, including Flash carts like the PowerPak and Everdrive. It has a built-in Four Score. It supports Component and HDMI output. It has a built in hardware upscaler. It supports wireless controllers with no input latency, light guns, and basically any 3rd party controller ever made. It also has a Famicom slot, so it'll play both NES and Famicom cartridges without adapters. It has the Famicom expansion port as well, so it'll even play Famicom Disk System games. It is the Nintendo completely reverse engineered using an Altera Cyclone V FPGA to emulate the hardware _in hardware_.

Granted, it's $450, but it plays your games perfectly, and on your modern hardware in ways that an original NES couldn't without RGB modding a top- loader and getting a separate upscaler.

I'm a retro speedrunner, and I intend on getting one later this year rather than modding my 30-year old NES (which I self-refurbish) and buying an upscaler and having a nest of cables.

Hobbyists are making some amazing stuff. Someone is currently making component cables that work with your SNES, as well as ones for the Sega Genesis and Sega Saturn. I'm on the waiting list to pounce when the next batch arrives. It's like classic cars. In the 60s no one cared. In the 80s and 90s people built businesses to fill the niche and take all the money being left on the table.

<comment><USER23> I know hardcore retro gamers consider "on hardware" and "on emulator" to be separate categories. I remember getting super mario world to memory jump to the credits on actual hardware was a big thing.

Where does Analogue NT fit in there? That's not ORIGINAL hardware. It could technically have different quirks that means minor differences could play out. That puts it more in the emulator category right?

<comment><USER26> It emulates the NES perfectly, since it exactly emulates the NES hardware on more powerful modern hardware. Every glitch will work exactly as it does on an actual NES. That was their goal. A few places have reviewed it to _ensure_ the glitches work as expected -- sure enough, they do.

They had some of the most hardcore folks in the emulation community included in the development. The guys who designed it wanted it to be reference quality. It supports all the options of every NES made, including full support for custom sound chips (like FDS versions of Castlevania 3, which sound amazing), and stuff like the PowerPak and Everdrive -- because to the game, it IS the NES.

It's exactly why I'm getting one myself. As a speedrunner, reference quality (whether on hardware or software) is a requirement for me to have my world records be considered legit.

<comment><USER23> That works for me. I wasnt trying to discredit the machine, I was asking with genuine curiosity, since I knew that there was a difference between emulators and "reference" hardware. Cheers :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> This is absolutely ridiculous, if they just supplied it correctly (something I was hoping they would learn to do by now) this thing would literally be free money for Nintendo. Or that's what it seems like to me - I know I would have at least bought one if it was available for the holiday season. How do they always underestimate the supply that they need?

</comment><comment><USER28> I have been hoping for an snes edition, but since the switch is doing so well, I highly doubt we will see it in the near future.

</comment><comment><USER29> Arrgh! I saw several of these sitting on the counter of a Gamestop just last week, but instead decided 'No, I was just able to get two Switch consoles. That's enough for today. I'll grab one of those in a week or two."

Now with this sudden announcement, no doubt those have vanished and I won't see one again without paying as much as a Switch ($300+) for one. Thanks, Nintendo. You're really listening to your fans here.

</comment><comment><USER30> Maybe it was eating into attention for the switch

Or maybe in additional to supply issues it was relatively expensive to produce?

<comment><USER31> Tough to say for sure regarding taking attention from the Switch but from what I've seen the Switch is still selling out very quickly from retailers. That makes me believe there is still high demand.

It could be that their virtual console once-released may be in competition for sales of classic games.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Discontinued despite never making it to Amazon or even the Nintendo store in the UK for retail price after the preorder! I'm guessing Nintendo isn't too bothered by people using emulators if they're withdrawing paid alternatives like this.

<comment><USER33> Nintendo continue to selling classics via their Virtual Console/store.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Don't worry! It's very easy to build a RetroPie box!

* RetroPie - Retro-gaming on the Raspberry Pi || [https://retropie.org.uk/](https://retropie.org.uk/)

</comment><comment><USER35> While sad, there are good emulators for the NES/Famicom. With a proper display and a controller you may not notice a substantial difference.

Now, while emulators are legal, ROMs may not. I wish Nintendo and others could release a desktop version of their legacy games shop.

I understand their business is "software sells hardware", but in the case of legacy games they could bring more revenue if they were a bit more open.

</comment><comment><USER36> I figured they would actually have to start producing something in order to "discontinue" it though? /s

Have yet to see stock anywhere except through scalpers. Nintendo continues to have a huge supply problem with basic availability of hardware, for whatever reason.

Would buy one in a heartbeat. Not going to reward a scumbag scalper by spending a penny over MSRP to do so though.

</comment><comment><USER37> In my opinion, Nintendo should release a FPGA-based NES/SNES, with low latency joypads, and perfect audio and video (including advanced filters for "clean" and "perfectly distorted" experience). That, plus a "market" so they can ensure profits, would be huge, both for them, and for the users.

<comment><USER38> The "Analogue Nt" fits the bill, but it's a pretty pricey option: [https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/07/analogue-nt-a- museum-...](https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/07/analogue-nt-a-museum-grade- nes-for-a-museum-grade-price/)

I don't know how low-latency the RetroN ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RetroN](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RetroN)) is but you can use the original games and gamepads with that. I think it's android-based, so it's a software emulator.

<comment><USER37> Sure. Exactly that. If Nintendo puts that FPGA into an ASIC, in volume it could cost less than 20 USD per chip.

<comment><USER39> Its not nintendo but from everything i can find its a pretty faithful reproduction of the hardware for a reasonablish price. [https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/12/retrousb-avs- review/](https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/12/retrousb-avs-review/) .I havent gotten one yet but I have been mighty tempted.

<comment><USER37> RetroUSB AVS is not a full hardware implementation, but a cartridge reader + software emulation, i.e. you'll have over 30ms delay (16.6ms * 2), because of framebuffer synchronization.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I got lucky and was able to get a pre-order of the initial batch. However, I didn't get a second controller which now seems very foolish. Looking around it seems that $30 is as cheap as I can expect to find one.

<comment><USER41> Is it more feasible to find an original NES controller and swap out the connector?

<comment><USER42> The new controls are basically Wiimote add-ons. The original NES controllers have a different communication protocol.

<comment><USER40> What looks more feasible than buying a second NES classic controller is to instead buy a Wii Classic Pro controller. No need to spend $40.

<comment><USER42> Are any of the cheaper knock-offs particularly good? The quality of 3rd party game controllers has always seemed hit or miss to me.

<comment><USER40> I'm not sure. I never buy third-party because of those quality issues.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> I didn't buy the NES Classic Edition (not interested in living room consoles), but it would be an instabuy if Nintendo made another run of the Gameboy with 30 good games for ~$50.

</comment><comment><USER44> Seems odd, there is still huge demand for this thing. Why discontinue it?

<comment><USER45> I think they want you to buy Switch and put all $ and focus on that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> The device has evidently been rooted to allow flashing other NES roms. I wonder if that had something to do with it.

</comment><comment><USER47> I'm sure a lot of people are going to recommend RetroPie and other emulation packages. I'm going to recommend against general-purpose emulation if you enjoy the games in question: [https://retropie.org.uk/forum/topic/2019/an- input-lag-invest...](https://retropie.org.uk/forum/topic/2019/an-input-lag- investigation/2)

<comment><USER48> Why that? I've been emulating nes and snes games for nearly twenty years now with no issues. Not clear why you recommend against it from reading your link.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> 1.5 million sold... any chance this will have any value in 50 years?

</comment><comment><USER50> Actually a decently hackable box. Stuck N64 and SNES support on it.

</comment><comment><USER51> I suppose the ones on Ebay prices tripled on this news.

</comment><comment><USER52> It seems that greasemonkey anti-aede works also inside HN. Didn't know. Nice.

</comment><comment><USER53> oh well, at least they haven't fucked me over w.r.t. the switch yet.

</comment><comment><USER54> I'm just gonna put this out there with no citations or proof: this controller[0] had the best hand feel of any console controller ever.

[0][https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Nintendo...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Nintendo- Entertainment-System-NES-Controller-FL.jpg)</comment>


Slump Is Putting New Stresses on Libraries and Librarians - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/us/02library.html <comment><USER2> My mother works as a reference librarian, and was explaining to me that a recent vacancy got around 200 applicants (people with MBAs, even).

What's interesting is that libraries have become the only way to connect to the ever important internet for people down on their luck. Since internet cafes are usually dark, seedy joints, I wonder if there's an opportunity to provide membership-based access to computers/internet in a comfortable setting. A library without books. I know my school's computer labs are always jam packed. There has to be a business model in there somewhere...</comment>


Ask HN: Are there good alternatives to Adsense for a recently launched site? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> "No ads" is a good alternative, because the extra spreadability you get is worth far more than the pennies you'll be able to extract from advertising at an audience of tens or hundreds.

The other alternative -- and again, "no ads" is better, is to put up your add blocks, seed with one ad for a related affiliate offer or even an ad-looking block towards a page in the space, and then have the other blocks say "Click here to buy this space." You can then do the simplest possible thing to enable that -- e.g. email me and I'll take your payment by Paypal.

<comment><USER3> Depending on your end goal, I completely disagree.

If you are putting up a company blog, sure no ads is fine. But if your ultimate plan is to have ads on the site, add them early. You don't want to spring them on people once you gain traction. There will be backlash.

Your premise behind no-ads seems to be that somehow people are more willing to share or visit a site with no ads. I don't think that's the case at all (within reason).

Also, selling your own ads tends to be a waste of time at small scale, unless you have very specialized and lucrative market.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Last I checked, and this was 6 months ago, there isn't really a comparable ad service to AdSense in terms of quality. Nothing else I've seen manages to serve such targeted, high quality ads.

That said, you can make good money from other approaches like affiliate marketing, products, and so on.

<comment><USER5> I agree. There is even remotely as good as adsense.</comment></comment>


First sensor to directly measure speed uses algorithms from fruit-fly - <AUTHOR> http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/hardware/a-flyeye-inspired-speed-sensor

<comment><USER2> IIRC the sensor uses optical flow and hence doesn't measure speed "directly" -- in spite of the fact that the article states so at its very beginning. Anyway, this technique is kind of promising and I'm curious to see the future results.</comment>